Skip to main content

About your Search

20130101
20130131
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
drastically increased the use of predator drones. 329 targeted strikes have taken place in pakistan since 2004, but the vast majority have taken place since 2009. although opposition to the president's use of drones has remained largely silent, that seems to be changing. two days ago in hawaii protesters paraded signs close to where the first family was vacationing, which read drones kill kids and is it really okay if obama does it? last week a federal judge ruled the administration did not need to disclose internal communications about the drone program. the "new york times" and the aclu had filed requests in 2011 for the legal justification of these targeted killings, including the drone strike that killed anwar al alaki, an american citizen living in yemen. the white house denied that request for purposes of national security. the judge approved the administration's right to keep that information classified, but still questioned the drone program, writing, "i can find no way around the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the executive brarchg of our government to proclaim
-based bureau of investigative journalism, the u.s. has conducted 362 drone strikes in pakistan since 2004 with 128 in 2010 alone. the program's covert nature has alarmed civil rights activists and the human rights council has now launched an investigation into drone attacks connected to civilian casualties. joining us now to discuss the war on terror is the director of the aclu, national security project, hannah. thanks for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> this is a conversation that i think gradually is taking more of a role on center stage. especially with the appointment of john brennan and as we look at john kerry and chuck hagel. in terms of u.s. national security and foreign policy, the get month trials, however, we -- there was a lot of discussion, a lot of hub bub when they were going to be in new york, but here they are beginning in guantanamo bay, and there is very little discussion about the fact that they are happening there. you guys have challenged the sort of legitimacy of these. the nation writes today "at guantanamo the government is still making up the law as i
saw in pakistan, afghanistan. they find large open areas of land, failed states, weak states where they can kind of operate outside the reach of the law, but very close to strategic interests, things that are important. al qaeda, which is also believed to be linked to the benghazi attacks, and now this incident. there's a long list of this pattern of behavior that has indicated they're becoming more potent, more lethal, and more dangerous as a result of the weak and failed states in the western part of africa. >> glen, in terms of the white house on this, you know, with syria, where the situation has not gotten markedly better. there are rumors about whether or not there was a cable detailing the syrian government using chemical weapons on its own people the president has drawn a shifting line. what is on his plate in terms of foreign policy is daunting. how much capital does he have to tackle that? he is going to have to deal with it one way or another, and to really draw american attention and resources to what's happening overseas. >> he has drawn a line in the sandstorm, right?
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)